BA Cabin Crew Strike Threat
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: leafy suburbs
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... and with all the fuss about EG300, things could be worse. Reuters report that “Malaysia has come up with new ways to crack down on work-shy government officials – publishing the names of those who fail to show up for work and checking on the homes of those who call in sick.” Though in BA's case checking Wimbledon etc
Mind you, as reported on Pprune, IFS are creating 32 new managers ….
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thumperdown,
All BA mainline routes, all ex-LHR.
-Vancouver return, twice.
-Outbound to Seattle, then inbound from San Francisco.
-JFK return, twice.
-Edinburgh and Glasgow shuttles a few times each.
I've only travelled BACON once, late last year, so I'm not too familiar with that product. However, the service on the aircraft was pretty good, the cabin crew (I think it was singular! - ERJ145) was cheerful and spent the whole flight wandering up and down chatting to passengers, and actually seemed to know some regular travellers' names. I actually wrote to BACON to commend her.
All BA mainline routes, all ex-LHR.
-Vancouver return, twice.
-Outbound to Seattle, then inbound from San Francisco.
-JFK return, twice.
-Edinburgh and Glasgow shuttles a few times each.
I've only travelled BACON once, late last year, so I'm not too familiar with that product. However, the service on the aircraft was pretty good, the cabin crew (I think it was singular! - ERJ145) was cheerful and spent the whole flight wandering up and down chatting to passengers, and actually seemed to know some regular travellers' names. I actually wrote to BACON to commend her.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Posted also on the Cabin Crew forum:
I agree that it is improper to raise the subject on duty. If, however, it is raised by CC then that is different, athough it is better to defer discussions until off-duty downroute. Indeed, it would be almost unbelievable not to discuss the biggest single issue that the company faces.
At the same time, I would not expect my colleagues or them to expect me to issue platitudes but to voice opinions that are held. They may well be diametrically opposed to those held by my CC colleagues, and vice versa. So long as the debate is conducted in the right manner (ie not a screaming lecture, or refusing to listen to counter views), everyone has to accept that and deal with it in any free society.
My personal opinion is that there are personailty issues and the overall relationship between BA and BASSA will need honest arbitration after this is over to get away from the parent-child relationship that has existed for too long. BA undoubtedly are the deaf parent and BASSA the petulant child in their pram with lots of toys. What needs to be recognised is that both sides can gain more by working together than by continual bickering.
Also to be recognised is that the company have chosen the timing of this dispute (BASSA may like to think they have by holding a ballot, but ask yourself about the behavioural patterns beforehand that have forced the BASSA hand). The timings are all in BA's favour; low time of year, just after Xmas and no pay since before Xmas, cabin crew with big Xmas credit card bills to pay - Feb pay could be much reduced if strike happens.
No, as I see it, BA are running rings around BASSA on the publicity front and the CC have no public support at all. However, the T&G and BA have both to find a way out, and both sides have to come out able to proclaim some sort of victory. Who gains what we will have to wait and see.
As I said before, after this is over, a 3rd party will have to get BA and BASSA around the table after analysing the relationship and formulate a plan to move forward. For sure the relationship cannot remain as it is. After the 1996 near-strike by the pilots, People-in-Business, iirc, were brought in to do the same job for BALPA/BA. I know that there are still many issues between BALPA and BA, but I believe in the immediate aftermath of 1996 it served a useful purpose.
The difference is, of course, that BALPA have always proved to be open to reasoned debate and had a management who accepted that they were needed.
BASSA/T&G have not proved, imho, open to reasoned debate and as a result the BA management won't play ball. The big question therefore is, can they both accept the challenge of the 21st Century and cabn BASSA regenerate themselves from a 1970's style TU?
I agree that it is improper to raise the subject on duty. If, however, it is raised by CC then that is different, athough it is better to defer discussions until off-duty downroute. Indeed, it would be almost unbelievable not to discuss the biggest single issue that the company faces.
At the same time, I would not expect my colleagues or them to expect me to issue platitudes but to voice opinions that are held. They may well be diametrically opposed to those held by my CC colleagues, and vice versa. So long as the debate is conducted in the right manner (ie not a screaming lecture, or refusing to listen to counter views), everyone has to accept that and deal with it in any free society.
My personal opinion is that there are personailty issues and the overall relationship between BA and BASSA will need honest arbitration after this is over to get away from the parent-child relationship that has existed for too long. BA undoubtedly are the deaf parent and BASSA the petulant child in their pram with lots of toys. What needs to be recognised is that both sides can gain more by working together than by continual bickering.
Also to be recognised is that the company have chosen the timing of this dispute (BASSA may like to think they have by holding a ballot, but ask yourself about the behavioural patterns beforehand that have forced the BASSA hand). The timings are all in BA's favour; low time of year, just after Xmas and no pay since before Xmas, cabin crew with big Xmas credit card bills to pay - Feb pay could be much reduced if strike happens.
No, as I see it, BA are running rings around BASSA on the publicity front and the CC have no public support at all. However, the T&G and BA have both to find a way out, and both sides have to come out able to proclaim some sort of victory. Who gains what we will have to wait and see.
As I said before, after this is over, a 3rd party will have to get BA and BASSA around the table after analysing the relationship and formulate a plan to move forward. For sure the relationship cannot remain as it is. After the 1996 near-strike by the pilots, People-in-Business, iirc, were brought in to do the same job for BALPA/BA. I know that there are still many issues between BALPA and BA, but I believe in the immediate aftermath of 1996 it served a useful purpose.
The difference is, of course, that BALPA have always proved to be open to reasoned debate and had a management who accepted that they were needed.
BASSA/T&G have not proved, imho, open to reasoned debate and as a result the BA management won't play ball. The big question therefore is, can they both accept the challenge of the 21st Century and cabn BASSA regenerate themselves from a 1970's style TU?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A chairman's role has changed significantly in the (large size) corporate world generally, with a clear separation of roles between an independent chairman (long term corporate strategy etc) and a CEO actually running the business operationally.
Very different from Lord King's day. That was partly because there was no such clear demarcation of roles in those days, and partly because of Lord King's personality! He was very much the executive boss, with a managing director below him. Much the same applied, some say to a lesser extent, when Lord Marshall became Chairman.
Wille Walsh has been given a job to do and will be allowed to get on with it.
If he fails, they'll get rid of him. Although, if the 'golden goodbye' Ayling received following his incompetence is any indication, that's more a blow to pride than pocket.
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In this dispute has anyone heard from the British Airways chairman?
I too had to chuckle at the reports in the times and WW's assertion that servces out of Regional Airports operated by BA Connect would be operating normally. He conveniently forgot to mention that he was selling this ("Basket Case Operation with no strategic importance to BA") by the end of the week. - (Correction, - giving it away!).
I don't know how WW and the BA board defines strategic importance, but I would guess that carying more BA customers than the rest of BA next week means that it might be worthy of an upgrade from "basket Case". It wasn't until BA and DE screwed it up.
PS, I have to admit to breaking SOP's and reading the Times article on the flight deck. I comitted this "crime" on the basis that WW only seems to communicate with his workforce through the press. I treat the business section of the times as an internal company memo. Without it, we would be completely in the dark.
But then maybe that's what he wants.
I don't know how WW and the BA board defines strategic importance, but I would guess that carying more BA customers than the rest of BA next week means that it might be worthy of an upgrade from "basket Case". It wasn't until BA and DE screwed it up.
PS, I have to admit to breaking SOP's and reading the Times article on the flight deck. I comitted this "crime" on the basis that WW only seems to communicate with his workforce through the press. I treat the business section of the times as an internal company memo. Without it, we would be completely in the dark.
But then maybe that's what he wants.
Controversial, moi?
It is striking that on this thread there have been several reasoned and factual posts from individuals with, presumably, no axe to grind, who travel regularly in premium cabins. Some of those posters have never felt moved to post before which speaks louder than their words.
The question is is anybody (BA employees and managers alike) listening or are we still in a state of self - denial?
The question is is anybody (BA employees and managers alike) listening or are we still in a state of self - denial?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Heathrow
Age: 63
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Marty
Here we go then and the maths are easy.
Inflations 5% and 10 years
Loader = 2 Incruments of 5%
Pilot = 10 Incruments of 5%
10 Year period > Watch
Loader +
1 = £10000PA = £500 Pension Pay In
2 = £10500PA = £550 Pension Pay In
3 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
4 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
5 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
6 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
7 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
8 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
9 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
10 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
Now i have kept the years simple and not included inflation for the same reason ( likewise i havent done the extra to retire earlier either ), lets say after 10 years you get 1/4 of your FSS pension
The Loader will have Paid in £5850 over 10 years to get £2500 PA ( 42% )
Same for Pilot
1 = £40000PA = £2000 Pension Pay In
2 = £42000PA = £2100 Pension Pay In
3 = £44100PA = £2205 Pension Pay In
4 = £46305PA = £2315.25 Pension Pay In
5 = £48620.25 = £2431 Pension Pay In
6 = £51051 = £2552.25 Pension Pay In
7 = £53603 = £2680 Pension Pay In
8 = £56283 = £2814 Pension Pay In
9 = £59097 = £2955 Pension Pay In
10 = £62051 = £3102 Pension Pay In
The Pilot will have paid in £25154.5 over 10 years to get £ 15512 ( 62% )
The figures Bias significantly when you go further towards 24 Incruments - which seems fairer to you?
Here we go then and the maths are easy.
Inflations 5% and 10 years
Loader = 2 Incruments of 5%
Pilot = 10 Incruments of 5%
10 Year period > Watch
Loader +
1 = £10000PA = £500 Pension Pay In
2 = £10500PA = £550 Pension Pay In
3 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
4 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
5 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
6 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
7 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
8 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
9 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
10 = £11000PA = £600 Pension Pay In
Now i have kept the years simple and not included inflation for the same reason ( likewise i havent done the extra to retire earlier either ), lets say after 10 years you get 1/4 of your FSS pension
The Loader will have Paid in £5850 over 10 years to get £2500 PA ( 42% )
Same for Pilot
1 = £40000PA = £2000 Pension Pay In
2 = £42000PA = £2100 Pension Pay In
3 = £44100PA = £2205 Pension Pay In
4 = £46305PA = £2315.25 Pension Pay In
5 = £48620.25 = £2431 Pension Pay In
6 = £51051 = £2552.25 Pension Pay In
7 = £53603 = £2680 Pension Pay In
8 = £56283 = £2814 Pension Pay In
9 = £59097 = £2955 Pension Pay In
10 = £62051 = £3102 Pension Pay In
The Pilot will have paid in £25154.5 over 10 years to get £ 15512 ( 62% )
The figures Bias significantly when you go further towards 24 Incruments - which seems fairer to you?
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Overseas
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And for 900 and his green eyed, I-cant-hear-what-I-dont-want-to-hear comrades -
We have been advised to accept the new pension because we have been told by external experts (whom we spent our subs on employing at no small expense) that this is the most the company can afford. It really is as simple as that.
I will still lose 15%-20%ish of my NAPS pension if I want to leave at my original contracted date, and work for an extra 5 years if not.
Its not perfect. We haven't been bribed. Is it a better deal than for someone else in the company? Possibly but then I'm lucky enough to earn more than most people in the company. We have simply done what professionals do - listen to the best evidence and make a decision based on it.
One day, an honest TU rep may tell you how much the other unions owe BALPA for saving their ars%s on this one. Maybe one day someone will say thanks. But I'm not holding my breath. Perhaps for now you should just be asking your reps why the smallest Union in the company made ALL the running on the pension debate. Maybe you'll get an apology. Maybe they'll just tell you more lies about BALPA/FC - and you should ask yourself why they do it......
We have been advised to accept the new pension because we have been told by external experts (whom we spent our subs on employing at no small expense) that this is the most the company can afford. It really is as simple as that.
I will still lose 15%-20%ish of my NAPS pension if I want to leave at my original contracted date, and work for an extra 5 years if not.
Its not perfect. We haven't been bribed. Is it a better deal than for someone else in the company? Possibly but then I'm lucky enough to earn more than most people in the company. We have simply done what professionals do - listen to the best evidence and make a decision based on it.
One day, an honest TU rep may tell you how much the other unions owe BALPA for saving their ars%s on this one. Maybe one day someone will say thanks. But I'm not holding my breath. Perhaps for now you should just be asking your reps why the smallest Union in the company made ALL the running on the pension debate. Maybe you'll get an apology. Maybe they'll just tell you more lies about BALPA/FC - and you should ask yourself why they do it......
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rimmer - with maths like yours I am surprised you can call yourself an engineer. Apart from the completely arbitrary nature you seem to have conveniently (perhaps deliberately) overlooked the effects of BAs contributions. BA have historically paid approximately 2.5 times the contributions of ground based workers and 3.8 times the contributions of pilots. Whether or not you like that is as irrelevant to the thread as whether or not you like pilots getting higher pay than other people. Its part of the remuneration package. So lets see what those numbers do to your simple figures:
The loader contributes £5850
BA contributes for him 2.5*£5850 = £14625
His total pension pot is £20475
His final pension in your example is £2500
That means he is receiving a pension equivalent to 12.2% of his total pot.
The pilot contributes £25154
BA contributes for him 3.8*£25154 = £95585
His total pension pot is £120739
His final pension in your example is £15512
That means he is receiving a pension equivalent to 12.8% of his total pot.
Given the totally arbitrary nature of your numbers and the inherent scope for error they introduce I would say that the loader and the pilot are on essentially the same deal.
You see this is why the pension trustees employ experts to advise them rather than just doing the sums themselves on the back of a fag packet.
Last edited by Carnage Matey!; 27th Jan 2007 at 13:56.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA - Not as we know it...
Rumours surfacing yet again as to the 'future' of BA... With all the chaos currently engulfing the company this may not be too far from the truth...
Share-price going down steadily pre strike - quicker than the Titanic post strike, making ideal conditions for a take-over. Story has it that EK looked into buying a major stake in BA last year, but didnt want the 'Regional/Domestic' part of the business. Well well well... Now that the regional side of things has been decided (even if flybe pull out of the deal, BA will chop Connect), LGW flights to NCL suspended from summer schedule, LGW to EDI-GLA-MAN being looked at with a microscope, Cabin crew almost out on strike etc etc it makes interesting reading in that anyone with a bit of spare cash (Sheiks, Princes, Kings and Rulers) could easily pick up BA for a song, and inherit a lot of problems, BUT inherit the entire route network, aircraft and crews, infrastructure and slots at LHR and also the knowledge that things could only get better (with investment) - provided they kicked WWs ass from Bovingdon to high-heaven!
With BMED and GB also going through some turbulence, who knows. Stranger things have happened and with the little green man from over the water (so he is) at the controls, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!!!
Share-price going down steadily pre strike - quicker than the Titanic post strike, making ideal conditions for a take-over. Story has it that EK looked into buying a major stake in BA last year, but didnt want the 'Regional/Domestic' part of the business. Well well well... Now that the regional side of things has been decided (even if flybe pull out of the deal, BA will chop Connect), LGW flights to NCL suspended from summer schedule, LGW to EDI-GLA-MAN being looked at with a microscope, Cabin crew almost out on strike etc etc it makes interesting reading in that anyone with a bit of spare cash (Sheiks, Princes, Kings and Rulers) could easily pick up BA for a song, and inherit a lot of problems, BUT inherit the entire route network, aircraft and crews, infrastructure and slots at LHR and also the knowledge that things could only get better (with investment) - provided they kicked WWs ass from Bovingdon to high-heaven!
With BMED and GB also going through some turbulence, who knows. Stranger things have happened and with the little green man from over the water (so he is) at the controls, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE!!!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wait until Monday... Bookings down considerably on this time last year - more so since the threat of strike action.
WW will have to pull something out of his big top hat to salvage not only BA but his career. These are ideal conditions for shareholders to sell-up while they still can. Iam not saying it will happen, but its a possability.
PS - If BA were a football team they would be facing relegation - and would have had a new manager / management team in place by now
Struggling isnt the word. Whats more is that who is backing WW? Its certainly not the staff, and Ive heard the 'City' are very nervous about the way things are going. He seems to be on a mission to destroy the company. Now that GMB ground staff have been balloted on strike action whos next? The GMB ground staff vote closes on Tuesday 31JAN07 - 7 days later, an official strike 'could' take place - legally
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Point taken... Yesterday though.
Wait until Monday... Bookings down considerably on this time last year - more so since the threat of strike action.
WW will have to pull something out of his big top hat to salvage not only BA but his career. These are ideal conditions for shareholders to sell-up while they still can. Iam not saying it will happen, but its a possability.
PS - If BA were a football team they would be facing relegation - and would have had a new manager / management team in place by now
Wait until Monday... Bookings down considerably on this time last year - more so since the threat of strike action.
WW will have to pull something out of his big top hat to salvage not only BA but his career. These are ideal conditions for shareholders to sell-up while they still can. Iam not saying it will happen, but its a possability.
PS - If BA were a football team they would be facing relegation - and would have had a new manager / management team in place by now